Abstract
The objectives of this study were to explore the concurrent validity of test results of upper lifting tasks of the Ergo-Kit FCE and the Isernhagen Work Systems (IWS) FCE. Seventy-one healthy young adults performed 5 upper lifting tests with at least 5 min of rest in between. The lifting tests included 3 standard protocols and 2 modified protocols. Three criteria for concurrent validity were established: 1) Pearson correlation higher than .75, 2) nonsignificant two-tailed t test, and 3) mean difference smaller than 5 kg. The results showed that none of the criteria were met for the standard protocols. For the modified protocols criteria 2 and 3 were not met. Individual differences larger than 10 kg were found for both standard and modified protocols. It was concluded that the standard protocols for upper lifting tasks of the Ergo-Kit FCE and the IWS FCE do not meet the criteria for concurrent validity and can, therefore, not be used interchangeably.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Innes,E, Straker,L. A clinician's guide toe work-related assessments: 3. Administration and interpretation problems. Work 1998; 11: 207-219.
Ayoub,MM, Selan,JL, Liles,DH. An ergonomics approach for the design of manual materials-handling tasks. Hum Factors 1983; 25(5): 507-515.
Liles,DH, Deivanayagam,S, Ayoub,MM, Mahajan,P. A Job Severity Index for the evaluation and control of fifting injury. Hum Factors 1984; 26(6): 683-693.
Isernhagen,SJ. Functional capacity evaluation: Rationale, procedure, utility of the kinesiophysical approach. J Occup Rehabil 1992; 2(3): 157-168.
Innes,E, Straker,L. Reliability of work-related assessments. Work 1999; 13(2): 105-122.
Innes,E, Straker,L. Validity of work-related assessments. Work 1999; 13(2): 125-152.
Lechner,DE, Jackson,JR, Roth,DL, Straaton,DV. Reliability and validity of a newly developed test of physical work performance. J Occup Med 1994; 36: 997-1004.
Gross,DP, BattiéMC. Reliability of safe maximum lifting determinations of a functional capacity evaluation. Phys Ther 2002; 82(4): 364-371.
Reneman,MF, Dijkstra,PU, Westmaas,M, Goëken,LNH. Test-retest reliability of lifting and carrying in a 2-day functional capacity evaluation. J Occup Med Rehabil 2002; 12(4): 269-275.
Dusik,LA, Menard,MR, Cooke,C, Beach,GN. Concurrent validity of the ERGOS work simulator versus conventional functional capacity evaluation techniques in a worker's compensation population. J Occup Med 1993; 35(8): 759-767.
Fisbain,DA, Cutler,RB, Rosomoff,H, Khalil,T, Abdel-Moty,E, Steele-Rosomoff,R. Validity of the Dictionary of Occupational Titles residual functional capacity battery. Clin J Pain 1999; 15(2): 102-110.
Matheson,LM, Isernhagen,SJ, Hart,DL. Relationship among lifting ability, grip force and return to work. Phys Ther 2002; 82: 249-256.
Waters,TR, Putz-Anderson,V, Garg,A, Pine,LJ. Revised NIOSH equation for the design and evaluation of manual lifting tasks. Ergonomics 1993; 36(7): 749-776.
Mital,A, Nicholson,AS and Ayoub,MM. A guide to manual materials handling, 2nd ed. London: Taylor & Francis, 1997.
Ergo-Kit handleiding 2.0 (in Dutch). Bussum: PGB, 1997.
Handleiding Ergo-Kit (in Dutch). Enschede: Ergo Control, 2000.
Borg,G. Borg's perceived exertion and pain scales. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1998.
Schellekens,J. Beweging als warming-up voor werkhervatting: tussenrapportage (in Dutch). Amsterdam: Lisv, 2001. Unpublished data.
Matheson,NL, Mooney,V, Grant,JE, Affleck,M, Hall,H, Melles,T, Lichter,RL, McIntosh,G. A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 1-Development and reliability testing. Spine 1995; 20(19): 2119-2129.
Isernhagen Work Systems. Functional capacity evaluation manual. 1st edn. Duluth, MN, 1997.
Brouwer,S, Reneman,MF, Dijkstra,PU, Groothoff,JW, Schellekens, JW, Goëken,LNH. Test-retest reliability of the Isernhagen work systems functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain. J Occup Rehabil 2003; 13: 207-218.
Isernhagen,SJ, Hart,DL, Matheson,LM. Reliability of independent observer judgments of level of lift effort in a kinesophysical functional capacity evaluation. Work 1999; 12: 145-150.
Reneman,MF, Jaegers,SMHJ, Westmaas,M, Goëken,LNH. The reliability of determining effort level of lifting and carrying in a functional capacity evaluation. Work 2002; 18: 23-27.
Bland,JM, Altman, DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 8: 307-310.
Functionele mogelijkheden en voorwaarden voor het verrichten van arbeid. Instrument voor verzekeringsarts en arbeidsdeskundige (in Dutch). Amsterdam: Lisv, 2001. (www.lisv.nl/uwv/content/wetten/cbbs/FMLdecember2001.PDF)
Kim,JY, Chung,MK, Park,JS. Measurement of physical work capacity during arm and shoulder lifting at various shoulder flexion and ad/abduction angles. Hum Factors Ergon Manufact 2003; 13(2): 153-163.
Drury,CG, Pizatella,T. Hand placement in manual materials handling. Hum Factors 1983; 25(5): 551-562.
CBBS Normaalwaarden (in Dutch). Amsteram: Lisv, 2001. (www.lisv.nl/uwv/content/wetten/cbbs/Normaalwaarden.PDF)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
IJmker, S., Gerrits, E.H.J. & Reneman, M.F. Upper Lifting Performance of Healthy Young Adults in Functional Capacity Evaluations: A Comparison of Two Protocols. J Occup Rehabil 13, 297–305 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026229006792
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026229006792